Comments 0

Document transcript

are abstracts of the papers I presented and wrote for conferencesoverthe past half dozen years, a few of which have been published

(see my cv); the restneed reworking for submission to various journals.

2012 Paper Presentations

Political Power and Technology: A New Global Order or Global Recolonization?

Paper presented at the ISA Annual Convention April 1-4, 2012, panel, “Bring UsTogether or Tear Us Apart? New Technologies and Social Cohesion”

Abstract

The speed, volume and storage capacity for information generation, transmission andretrieval is growing exponentially, apparently following “Moore's Law.” Concomitantincreases in cyber crime (theft and organized crime, sabotage, espionage, predation,vandalism, and the kind) grow right along with positive uses such as socialnetworking, banking, investing, scientific research. An interesting question is, wherewould one put politics? Is cyber politics value adding or value subtracting, or does itsimply add to the “load” on civilization, in the systems dynamics sense? To answerthis question requires first of all acybernetic definition of power, which is provided,then an examination of what if anything is unique to our burgeoning, higher techcivilization? I suggest some tentative conclusions that are surprisingly (to me)positive, in consideration of the decline of colonization and violent conflict over thelast 100+ years, the revolt against post-colonial collaborators with economic fascism,the rise of principled secular humanism in the midst of religious revivals around theworld, and the emerging concern with humanity's survival in a brutal universe.

Les Misérables, Power Élites and Revolutions:

Refreshing AmericanExceptionalism in an Era of Global Financial and Political Meltdown

Paper presented at the Midwest Political Science Association,

April 12-15,

section“Globalization and State Policy”

Abstract

Responses of the US and EU to the global financial crisis may indicate less afinancialmeltdown being averted than a historically repeated pattern effectivelyconsolidating controlby interlocking political-corporate networks. American historicalexperiences with bankingnetworks display an unrelenting struggle for, and against,economic power consolidationpunctuated with popular revolts not unlike the presentTea Party and Wall Streetdemonstrations, with political leaders bandwagoning on,usually leading rather abruptly to,a “new” economic order (e.g., the Federal Reserve,the New Deal, Great Society, and soon). Recognized by military leaders today asthe greatest threat to American nationalsecurity, the national debt crisis isapproached as yet another episode in the disjointed,incremental, occasionallychaotic, struggle for power through financial means. The militaryimplications offinancial warfare, are evidenced not only by the Iraqi and Afghan conflicts,whichdeeply involve the EU leadership states, the US, Russia and China, but also in thesemajor power centers' maneuvering in East Asia. After a brief theoretical andphilosophicalinterpretation of the history of major financial and political powerrelations, a variety ofalternative scenarios are examined with the aim of averting anend to Americanexceptionalism.

2011 Paper Presentations

Global Governance as Political Expansionism: A Reformulation ofSociopolitical Theory to Avoid Future Tragedies of Political Competition in aGlobal Sociopolitical System

If one construes the pursuit of “global governance” to mean political expansionism, itcan argued that for millennia “global governance” has been ubiquitously attempted bythe deployment of various combinations of force, finance, and faith (core beliefsystems). It is proposed that current efforts to construct a system of globalgovernance differ from past attempts primarily in terms of technology and culturaldetails, not in terms of the nature or purpose of the competition among global andlocal elites to preserve their

power and expand their spheres of influence. There is noreason to expect such elites to be any more likely to survive the dynamics ofchallenge than in past civilizations, nor to be more concerned about the quality of lifeof those under their spheres of

influence, unless the dynamics of political competitionbecome better understood. This paper reviews theories such as Doran's power cycletheory, Lasswell's political psychology, Diamond's theory of collapse, variousdecision theories of Jervis, Janis, and Saaty and others; and employs an “islands oftheory” approach (following Guetzkow) towards integrating them into a frameworksuitable for future theory development and possible application to the problematiqueof global governance.

Tensions on the Korean Peninsula: Cats and Mice or the Mouse that Roars?Four-Power Manipulations in a Fog of Irony and Pathos

The recent North Korean attackon a South Korean ship, killing 11 crew members,underscores the continuing vestiges of the Cold War and Korean War armistice--ordoes it? While the event suggests imminent conflict between two smaller powers, it iscontended here that the primary reason for the continuing tensions on the Koreanpeninsula is that the four major powers involved are unwilling to seek an agreementamong themselves to leave the fate of Koreans up to the self-determination ofKorean leadership groups on the Korean peninsula. Further, the reason for thisunwillingness is that none have given up hopes that in the future circumstances maychange that would enable one of them to reacquire control of the Korean peninsula.At the root of this explanation is the assumption that realistperspectives have notchanges and still control the minds of men. Thus only a major shift in the distributionof power and influence is likely to produce a significant change.

2010 Paper Presentations

On Some Unintended Consequences of Abandoning the Sacred in PoliticalTheory and Leadership

Contemporary political theory for global development and international securityappears to offer little to those yearnings for the assurances of sacred texts andsacred order, yet precisely such alienation from self-transcendence may lie at theheart of much political instability and inadequate leadership, including terrorism.When authority to govern is conceived of as legitimate to the exclusion of the sacred,it is suggested that authority may lose much of its intrinsic durability as a relationshipbetween the governed and the government. This thesis is explored first by examiningpre-Enlightenment models of the rise and fall of political regimes. Flowing from theEnlightenment, what constituted the “sacred” seems to have been deformed intoimplicit self-righteous arrogance embedded not only in Marxism-Leninism ideologyand fascist forms of social Darwinism and the abuses of juche (self reliance)ideology, but also in democratic capitalism and belief in intrinsic, universal humanrights. Reintegrating democratic political and economic theory with the culturaltraditions of the sacred may still bepossible, it is concluded, but to do so will requirea much deeper understanding of human psychology and political life.

Scholars, Practitioners, and a Metaparadigm to Reconnect Them through theirPhilosophical and Spiritual Roots

Paper presented at the ISA Annual Convention, Montreal, February 17-20, panel“Between Theory and Policy: Ideas for Narrowing the Gap”

Abstract

The gulf between scholars and practitioners of politics has been theorized since timeimmemorial yet the gap between hopes and realities, dreams and nightmares,remains. The is and the ought seem forever quixotically opposed. Recentpractitioners' “past is prologue” orientation is dashed against the futurists' vision that“any useful statement about the futures should appear to be ridiculous." A politicalscientist's examination of experience transformed into historical data teaches us thatno major power in the last century that started a major war won it, or for that matterretained its colonial empire. Wholly unexpected catastrophes for

the participants,however, were not unexpected among academics. The gap has not closed. Why isthis? It is suggested that fundamentally different paradigms distinguish politicalscience, political philosophy, and political practice. Each must act on categoricalimperatives that the others profoundly question. In particular, faith, reason andexperience, all essential to political life, are in varying degrees poorly integrated intothese paradigms. Drawing on applications to politics and history, humanistic

psychology, systems theory and the policy sciences, philosophy and various spiritualtraditions, an effort is made to theorize a framework for creating much neededunderstanding and integrating relations across these disciplinary divides.

National Security Implications of Financial Crises Rooted in CollectiveMismanagement and Misperception: Belief Systems as Systemic Constraintsand Crisis as a Condition for Change

The continuing global financial crisis and economic recession have far reachingnational security implications for the “American century.” Massive debt,unemployment, and fear of radically reduced living standards pose a national securitycrisis in itself, one not yet

adequately managed. At a deeper level transcendingblame, systemic frailties may be observed in leaders' belief systems and theirconstituencies. For instance, while the pursuit of power for protection of nationalinterests is

normal, “imperial overreach” is not. While bare knuckled competition isnormal (at least in the US), radical concentration of societal wealth and neglect ofphysical and social infrastructure are not. Can such failures in in the structure ofbelief systems be remedied, or will they pose a fatal threat to national security? It issuggested here that the threat need not be fatal if there is sufficient creative thinkingapplied to forge a more realistic and honest consensus. Historically the US hasshown thecapacity to do this under crisis, from the time of the US Constitution to theFederal Reserve, the UN, and the Department of Homeland Security. An outline ofwhat this new “Washington consensus” might become is presented and discussed.

Burns, Deneen, Deutsch, Easton, Festinger, Frankl, Lasswell, Maslow, Rawls,Skinner, Tillich, and Wiener have each made significant contributions to democratictheory that seem to slip through our fingers. This essay analyzes portions of theircontributions towards a theory of political leadership, employing components ofsystems dynamics theory, humanistic psychology, cybernetics, value theory anddemocratic philosophy. The theory, tentatively labeled “integrated dissonance theory”(IDT) is then used to interpret some of the multiple meanings of religion in politics,including democratic faith. Illustrative applications include current foreign policy

concerns with religious belief systems such as the “clash of civilizations” problem thatpits the interpretive frameworks of the current “great religions” against each other andagainst democratic faith. Further illustrations examine American domestic problemsfiltered through ideologies that pit racial and ethnic beliefs against each other, andissues such as size of government, whether budgets should be balanced, and so on.It concludes with an agenda for further research employing three distinct paradigms:science, philosophy, and historical practice.

2008 Paper Presentations

A National Interest Analysis of U.S. and East Asian Foreign Policies on Korea

Paper presented at the Midwest Political Science Association Convention, April 3-7,section “International Security”

Abstract

This is an analysis of the issues, values, priorities, and national interests of majorpowers on the Korean peninsula, evaluating a number of scenarios. Globalization,technological change, and terrorism have been addressed as trends and politicalproblems that impact Korea and the major powers in the region. Each is discussed interms of their impact on reunification strategies on the one hand, and maintaining thestatus quo on the other.

2007 Paper Presentations

Foreign Policy Challenges in the 21st Century: Disentangling the New Patternsof Interlaced Threats and Opportunities in East Asia.

Three interlaced paradigms prevail among international studies scholars today. Eachrequires assumptions or "categorical imperatives" which the others of necessity bringinto question. In the absence of recognition of this situation, academic cacophony,along with a great deal of frustration and alienation, takes place, primarily viamisplaced criticism.

The intersection of international politics, technology, and outer space offers a richarea for speculation as well as contemporary historical review. In this paper I addressseveral

key areas: (1) the fundamentals of IR theory and paradigms that I expect topersist and to be vital to our understanding and envisioning of future outer spaceregimes; (2) the nature ofongoing technological revolutions and their likely impactson key political problems of value distributions, including political stability and control;and (3) the nature of changes in beliefs and attitudes towards governance both bythe governed and the governing. I conclude that it will be necessary to grow ametadiscipline that permits rich discourse across and between the philosophical,scientific, and practical politics paradigms in which we are presently embedded, if weare to transcend their limitations and prepare for and create a future that is at oncecomplex, chaotic, manageable and desirable. I offer a few suggestions to those ends.

For the better half of the last century, the "north-south" distinction, the "east-west"distinction, and similar characterizations such as the "clash of civilizations"(Huntington) today, or the Gap group (Bennett),

have been employed to denote keycharacteristics of international politics and economics. Whether based on economic,technological, political, or religious and ethnic distinctions, it is argued here that suchcharacterizations are fundamentally misleading

polemics, distracting politicalscientists, philosophers, and practitioners from framing discourse in more usefulempirical, practical, and philosophical terms. A more careful treatment offundamentals such as the nature of political systems, political leadership andpsychology, and the ethics of political economy is vital to understanding andresponding to globalization phenomena. It is also argued that careful attention toparadigms and paradigm shifts between political philosophers, scientists andpractitioners is needed to more clearly frame key questions and relations betweenthem. A framework for recasting debates is offered in which modern political analysiscan more effectively address key issues in globalization such as the distribution ofvalues,environmental concerns, and terrorism.

Presented in Seoul at the Korea Institute for Defense Analyses, the ResearchInstitute for International Affairs, the Korea Institute for National Unification, aninternational conference on "North Korea's Strategy and Propaganda, and KoreanPeninsula Situation" of The Society World Peace and Unification; and in Busan,Korea at an international conference on the "North Korean Nuclear Problem andBuilding a Korean Peace Regime," supported by the German Ebert Foundation andhosted by the Institute for East Asian Studies (IEAS) at Dong-A University, 2006

Abstract

In November, the USA's National Intelligence Council released its 2020 ProjectReport, which included alternative scenarios for Korea as well as virtually all theworlds' countries. The scenarios were explored using the International Futuressimulation, a complex, multidimensional and multipurpose computer model anddatabase under development for the last 35 years. This paper examines the Koreancase from the perspective of four key dimensions of national security: development,democracy, peace, and unification. A transformation in the "power" of decision-making is taking place today, a feature of globalization that has not been the focus ofmedia or academic attention. It is emerging as a new phenomenon, far from fullydeveloped, yet one which already promises far greater social responsibility and socialjustice for average people worldwide. Korean society thus should benefit both fromthe trends in national security indicators and changes in the global decision makingethos. Korea's greatest immediate challenge, of course, remains relating to the Northinsuch a way as to promise long term unity with a minimum of political and socialdislocation to the advantage of both North and South. The trends in securityindicators and global decision making increasingly strengthen the opportunities tomeet this challenge successfully.

Long Term International Security: the International Futures Simulation andEmerging Global Order

Presented at the Midwest Political Science Association annual convention, Chicago,2006

Abstract

The National Intelligence Council's website features its 2020 Project report, Mappingthe Global Future. This report employs a global model available to the public andprovides a glimpse of several alternative futures and their national securityimplications. This paper discusses the computersimulation employed Hughes' IFs(International Futures simulation), the nature of IFs' alternative futures constructs in anational security context, the vital need for the production of this type of informationabout long term trends and options at all levels of politics from the global to the local,and the need for widespread education of the public in the application of suchmodels. It is noted that while more than thirty years of global modeling effortsinvolving all major international actors has yielded substantial progress in organizingour knowledge of global dynamics and trends, the ability to use such modelseffectively is limited by inadequate biosocial theory, political philosophy,understanding of interlaced paradigms embedded in the construction and applicationof global models, and the inadequate application of decision sciences to policyanalysis. A promising approach to the decision sciences issue, namely Tom Saaty'sanalytic network process, is discussed.

Reframing the Meaning of Democracy: The Globalization of DemocraticDevelopment, Viewed through the Paradigms of Political Science, PoliticalPractice and Political Philosophy

preeminence,“framing” or contextualizing democratization has become exceedingly important toglobal politics and culture as governments seek to adjust strategies to reshape andstabilize new relations. Practitioners ofpolitics, political scientists, and politicalphilosophers, however, continue to speak past one another, not substantivelyengaging each other in dialogs connecting the theory, historical data, and normativeor cultural contexts through which democratic development is presented. I suggestthree interrelated reasons for this conundrum: (1) there are three major and threeminor paradigms operative in this global “multilog," each of which serves differentfunctions in society, (2) the three major paradigms (political science, political practice,and political philosophy) each implicitly assume and are grounded in informationcategories that the other two normally address as objects of critical inquiry; and (3)those adopting a given paradigm generally put their faith in it and its products,creating an implicit distrust of the others. Specifically, scientists are grounded in theirresearch subculture; practitioners implicitly assume theories to produce models ofwhat is possible, likely and changeable; and philosophers take their data as given.Thus unrecognized in the debates are different purposes, modalities of reasoning,and faith-based disagreements. By uncovering the paradigmatic bases formiscommunication surrounding discussions of globalization and democraticdevelopment, a basis for more meaningful dialog can be laid, dialogs through whichpractical, philosophical, and scientific issues can be addressed in a more usefulmanner.

Twelve years ago I began the process of reconstructing my classroom environmentwith the aim of improving the quality of my students' learning environment. Threebenefits were anticipated: class size would increase, learning would increasequalitatively, and my personal workload would remain constant and/or decrease.None ofthese benefits were aimed at. Instead, the critical focus was on reducing thegap between (1) students' natural ability and their curiosity about the subject matter(international relations), and (2) the material to be learned (embodied by the texts,syllabus, and assignments). The general pedagogical approach was that promotedby W. Edwards Deming and his associate, David Langford. So far, the results havebeen, my class size has roughly tripled, students do exceptionally well on objectivetests, and my traditional workload has actually gone down. An unanticipated resultwas the introduction of an intergenerational learning process that takes place amongstudents across my classes over time, which results in spontaneous improvement inclass structure by the

students themselves. Also unanticipated was the difficulty Ihave had in keeping up with them--a most happy result!

Active Learning and Simulation in a Self-organizing International RelationsCourse with Feedback: a Pedagogical Breakthrough Enabling CoherentCommunication in Multicultural, Multilevel and Multivalue Environments

Three interwoven streams of pedagogy and methodology are discussed as applied tothe teaching

of international relations in a multicultural environment: (1) Deming's"theory of profound knowledge," (2) Hughes' International Futures simulation (IFs) ofthe global political economy and international conflict, and Saaty's "analytic hierarchyprocess"

for coherent decision making. The problems addressed include the teachingof critical thinking, appreciation of a systems perspective, and concepts ofdecisionmaking and value change. Key findings from twelve years of following aprocess of "continuous improvement" are put in the form of some controversialperspectives pertaining to: the optimal number of students in a classroom (80 ormore!), the classroom as a locus for the continuous improvement of a student culturefor learning (intergenerational learning across time in a classroom!), and theunresolved dilemma of addressing long term environmental problems given shortterm political orientations prevalent in international relations despite globalization.

Diasporadic Minorities, Terrorism, and Great Powers' National SecurityStrategies

"Diasporadic studies" today encompass studies of all migrant ethnic minorities.Because of the threat of terrorism as a strategy for destabilizing even great powers,diasporadic studies have assumed new meaning for international security studies, inparticular for reassessment of great power security policies towards their own andeach others' ethnicminorities. For a variety of reasons, it is often tacitly if notexplicitly assumed that migrant ethnic minorities are relatively more likely to harbor ifnot encourage or cultivate the formation and protection of terrorist organizations thatshare a common heritage. An alternative model is proposed here in favor of limitingsuch concerns to a much smaller number of migrant groups, viz., those who wereforced by governments to migrate, who were not welcomed in the "host" or receivingsocieties, and who have

not achieved an acceptable level of security. It is suggestedthat such diasporadic communities may be more likely than others to harbor andfacilitate groups motivated to develop and use terrorist strategies. Such communitiesare more likely than othersto remain cohesive because of external threats, morelikely to harbor hostilities against host societies, and support leaders who desirepolitical power to redress their grievances, since they are more likely to be subject todisrespect, injustice, and economic deprivations. Nevertheless, it is the latter, the factof perceived subjugation or oppression, that ultimately is the prime motivator, notethnic differences or ideologiesper se. Hence security strategy would be betterinformed by careful analysis of such social fractures and the uses made of issuesrelated to them by political organizers, than by studying resident, migrant, ethnicminorities in general. It is further suggested that internal political instability is more afunction of government repression both short and long term, than of significantminority ethnic groups, even if diasporadic in nature.

Levels of Meaning and Levels of Analysis: Exploring Micro-Macro, Local-GlobalInterface Problems with the International Futures Simulation (IFs),using Hawaiias an Exemplar

Richard W. Chadwick, paper presented at the First International Studies Conference,Bilgi University, Istanbul, August 2005

Abstract

A few years ago, Barry Hughes and I embarked on a project to understand what wasneeded for his global model, the International Futures simulation (IFs), to be moreuseful for exploring local development issues from a policy planning perspective.The central methodological question was how to relate global change to localdecision-making concernsand decision-making. After setting IFs’ development in thecontext of globalization and futures studies, results to date are presented for an IFsapplication to Hawaii as a exemplar for futures research with global models. Thisessay aims first to clearaway some intellectual underbrush, then focus on only two orthree of the hundreds of trends IFs generates for Hawaii and the rest of the world, inparticular demographic projections to 2025 and some economic data. I then examinethose trends for a few of

their possible public policy implications, and lightly touch onthe analytic network process (ANP) decision analysis software used to organizeinformation for policy making purposes.

Self, Society, and Survival: Values and Security Paradigms in an EmergentGlobal Order

Richard W. Chadwick, paper presented at the joint annual conference of theInternational Strategic Studies Section (ISSS) of ISA and the ISAC of the APSA, co-sponsored by GSIS and IGLOS, University of Denver, INSS, USAF Academy, andthe Denver Council on Foreign Relations, Denver, 2005

Abstract:

From Sun Tzu'sArt of War

to Ullman and Wade'sShock and Awe, to Friedman'sEarth Is Flat, and Barnett'sPentagon's New Map, the conceptual frameworksproposed to guide and manage leaders and followers alike in the path to globalizedcivilization, would seem to echo both the chaos and complexity of the contemporaryworld. Gone are the days of "Guns, Germs, and Steel" around which empires werebuilt. Gone too are simple, single factor explanations such as surplus energy, themercantilist version (favorable trade balance), and their complex, modernist versions(diffusion of the Internet, the RMA and weapons interoperability, shock and awe) andso on. We are left with a huge gap, a need for a comprehensive and comprehensibleparadigm for understanding, orienting, and conceptualizing oneself in the globalorder, a need for a framework that appeals to our passions and gives form andsubstance to our hopes. A conclusion emerges that integrates key values embeddedin some eastern as well as western writers, and builds bridges between such diversethinkers as Freud, Skinner, Maslow, Wiener, Parsons, Easton, Lasswell, Saaty,Linsky and Heifetz, and Hughes. The essay concludes with why it is we must relyona core democratic faith and a global security regimen, which enables freedom andopportunity as well as responsibility and order as key values all humanity canenvision.